Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2017 20:07:42 +0200 From: Joakim Sindholt <opensource@...sha.com> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: byteswap.h On Fri, Apr 07, 2017 at 07:53:09PM +0200, fab10 wrote: > I had a look at byteswap.h and it seems to me that the code is not very > efficient. Every function in this header could be translated in a single > assembly instruction with the gcc intrinsics: > > __builtin_bswap16 > __builtin_bswap32 > __builtin_bswap64 > > Is there a reason to not use these gcc intrinsics? > > Bye > While musl does employ GNU C features in quite a few places it's just plain unnecessary here. https://godbolt.org/g/eLZWwI When optimized those functions yield a single bswap instruction anyway, because GCC is smart enough to deduce this.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.